[..] If anyone, including noted scientists, say anything remotely the opposite of the climate change cabal, they are run out of town, belitted by their peers. They have their jobs & credentials taken away. That sounds more like the status quo is trying to hide something to me.
Bullshit. Show me any data showing systematic oppression of scientists with valid scientific results opposing climate change. (You probably forgot to copy the word "anthropogenic" somewhere in that sentence)
When I was growing up, I was always taught to question the mainstream. But if you do that when it comes to climate change, you are labeled a nut.
Well, you probably will be shocked, but the way you were taught is irrelevant to the way science works. Don't know about nuts, but anyone can question whatever scientific statements they want, just please use scientific method.
But there is one very important difference between corporations and societies (in most places). Societies are more or less democratic, while corporations are strictly hierarchical and authoritarian (fascist). That's why it is a good idea to society to force some restrictions on corporations - there is bigger chance that people will get their say too.
Agreed-upon distribution scheme? - come on, how many capitalists discuss distribution of profits with their workers? I think it is more like forced-by-economic/social-situation distribution scheme.
On November 22, 1977, as it motored down the street somewhere south of San Francisco, a souped-up delivery van sent some information to a computer lab at the University of Southern California, 400 miles away. No one can quite remember what the information was, but that really doesn't matter. What matters is the way it traveled.
A bug in the code is worth two in the documentation.